- NEW!
by Phil in the Blank...backandtotheleft on November 22nd, 2009
Help answer this question below.
by Anonymous T on January 7th, 2010
Selected by the asker, Phil in the Blank...backandtotheleft. (What's this?)
I don't think that would work, I'd rather if people got educated
more on smoking and methods of getting out of the addiction.
by XT on November 22nd, 2009
No. Thank you.
by PrincessErin1986 on November 22nd, 2009
No, not really. If your gonna do that then I want all fattening foods made illegal to, along with alcohol. +4
by heidioftheopera on November 23rd, 2009
If we've learned anything from the Eighteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, prohibition does not solve the problem (and there's enough contemporary crime based on illegal substances to begin with)
by Anonymous on November 23rd, 2009
No, that wouldn't work very well.
+5
by Sharona Life is a Tale Told by an Idiot on November 22nd, 2009
No I would like to see people grow some brain cells.
by Stranger in a Strange Land on November 22nd, 2009
So you can throw tobacco users in jail with the marijuana users? +4
by christ1 on November 23rd, 2009
yes
ofcourse
by Anonymous on November 23rd, 2009
No way live and let live.
by -Slick- on November 23rd, 2009
Would not be a good idea. +5
by Tania Lue on November 23rd, 2009
No. The government should not have to be involved in the personal decisions in life styles of their citizens.
People are aware of the consequences. It is futile to try and make illegal something that goes back to our ancestors.
by Tom 47 is back in his bear COAT on November 23rd, 2009
It would just be another control "failure", like prohibition was and simply criminalize another huge segment of the population with all the expense and wasted time and money.
by Toiletcruncher on November 23rd, 2009
No. And I'm not a smoker. I just think that we all should be left alone, and left to decide what we want to do with our own lives. Besides which, the funding that smokers contribute in taxes to the NHS over say- 30 years of having the habit, far outweighs the cost of their OWN treatment for smoking related disease later in their lives. People are not ill for years and years with lung cancer now are they? Its a relatively quick death from first diagnosis. I think with education from parents etc, smoking SHOULD be a thing of the past within the next two decades anyway, without the need for an imposed ban (and making potential criminals out of otherwise good people)and a practice reserved for a very small stubborn minority, who of course will not be as readily replaced when they die.
by buxtonite ..slowly losing my mind on November 23rd, 2009
No... and I am an ex smoker!, its a choice and should remain so if you smoke or not... I can think of a hell of a lot of other things I would ban first..eg: food colourings, preservatives in food and drink,dogooders sticking their noses in other peoples private lives
by strange1 still in pb on November 23rd, 2009
not all because its used in alternative quitting products. i use the electronic cig a battery powered vapouriser, it needs nicotine liquid to work. slightly easier to control baccy i think- just tax the hell out of it!
by vincentcent on November 23rd, 2009
Yeah, actually I would like to see it of the shelf. But it they did overnight there would be a lot of angry depressed people due the nicotine withdrawals.
by laaayla on November 23rd, 2009
What and deprive the fools who smoke and chew despite knowing what it's doing to their health? In case you didn't realize it I'm kidding. I can't imagine people from coast to coast all going through withdrawal at once if all tobacco was made illegal. Can you imagine what would happen? I wouldn't want to run into a person that involuntarily had to quit smoking. Talk about road rage then, among other things. People are basically going to do what they do...regardless if it's illegal or not. Smoke cigarettes, smoke marijuana, smoke crack...whatever. Most people know that there "was" a campaign to "not" start smoking in the first place backed by (I believe) R.J. Reynolds(?) courtesy of a lawsuit. I think slapping a diseased lung down in front of first grader's might make more of an impression. The teacher could say, "Now this is what is going to happen to you if you smoke". And maybe throw in a few pictures of people having to lug around oxygen to go along with it. An oxygen tank is not exactly a fashion accessory. Hmmm...just a thought...doesn't our current President smoke? I don't believe I've seen any pictures of that, have you?
by Questionbag on November 23rd, 2009
will never happen, as my religion makes me!!!!
by Maggge on November 22nd, 2009
Don't think it might be good, as haste decisions can't stand for a long long time instead it make ruptures in terms of unemployment, business relation activitives and stock markets. No wonder this tobacco products makes a big crunch in spinning money in all aspects. I think it would be good if we go on step by step and inch closer to where we would like that product to be.
My kinda example would be to cut down the production ratio first and ask the manufacturers to diversify to other activities like for e.g. more contrastingly doing good to society like where we would like them to be so that it will make them feel that they are also taking part in doing good and getting themselves placed among the do gooder's as it progresses in future. How's that from my end.
by The0Rising on November 22nd, 2009
Nope, because if you did it would just be imported illegally and who would want to get arrested for smoking/importing tobacco lol!!
by Anonymous on November 22nd, 2009
Yes, this way this would diminish drastically second hand smoke, especially for children.
by Smileysteph on January 7th, 2010
Yes Yes Yes
by Robert on November 23rd, 2009
I can't help but chuckle a bit whenever I see this sort of question. The short explanation is this: both the states and the federal government collect billions and billions of dollars in tax revenue each year. On top of that, the states are also collecting money from the tobacco lawsuit settlement ($250 billion to be paid over 25 years) and 17 of those states have even borrowed against that money.
So yeah, let's make tobacco illegal and cut off those revenue streams for the government. I guarantee they'll find another way to come up with the money and I very much doubt you'd like it. ;)
by The Chief on November 23rd, 2009
Nope.
What I WOULD like to see is SMOKERS being held accountable for the consequences of their own habits.
The class action lawsuits of the 90's really p*ssed me off when thousands of smokers lied their collective *sses off when they stood up and said "I didn't know smoking was bad for me!"
Bullsh*t.
by ??? on November 23rd, 2009
No I wouldn't... I would like to see the promotion of health and well-being made ulta legal.
Can you smoke aloe?
by Answerbag Staff on August 4th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
How much nicotine was in a cigarette in 1612?
by Answerbag Staff on July 31st, 2010
| 1 person likes this
What year were warning labels put on cigarette packs?
by Answerbag Staff on July 23rd, 2010
| 1 person likes this
Would you agree that cigarettes are over priced?
by ARTICFOX700 on January 16th, 2012
| 8 people like this
What brand of Cigarettes do you smoke? I like Lucky Strikes.
by President Norris 2016 on January 16th, 2012
| 7 people like this
You're reading Would you like to see ALL tobacco products made illegal?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
Sorry for such a long delay in commenting, but nice graft! Instead of a "war" on drugs we should have a war on tobacco!!!
by Phil in the Blank...backandtotheleft on April 13th, 2010